rbuckton: go for it, commit's pushed to the proposals repo already

there's a simple two step solution here:

1. at() returns a reference instead of a value
2. change assignment semantics to allow new values to be returned

I am a bit uncomfortable with how this advancement went

Ashley Claymore: please work on a rough initial reduced list and link it here for interested parties before end of the plenary if possible

devsnek the analogy is weak. Other than what Bakkot has said, it just indicates ShadowRealm is not the main Realm.

can someone please give cjtenny access to post?

yulia: i see, if there's a concrete example i'd love to see. i'm pretty neutral to slightly negative on any and all FP proposals, to be clear, and this seemed unproblematic at first glance for implementations, but might've missed something!

I don't see how this makes method extraction harder

pipeline is conceptually reassigning?

i don't share that reassigning-is-gross opinion, is that a linting thing?

same reason let is strongly discouraged in favor of const

is this an accurate summary: it is easier to try for higher quality code to forbid reassignment stylistically, and that's of higher priority even though it takes out "linearization via reusing the same temp var" as collateral

especially the withA/B/C example, how is Component |> withC(%) |> withB(%) |> withA(%) clearer?

the compiler turns it all into electricity anyways, "what the compiler does" doesn't matter

we found out apparently Shadow Realm was a euphemism put in in the Yugioh dub to soften the concept of "death"

Stage 2 on Pipeline Operator is kind-of a big deal... I would have liked to have seen a lot more data and surveys about how this will impact practitioners and code readability in the long term. We have the TC39 Research Call for this exact purpose, but Pipeline Operator has not been a subject of that call, at least not for a long time. Stage advancement seemed rushed.

didn't mark propose a syntax for building up async chains

with a special await form

Huh, maybe some kind of research could be proposed as a request of the champion group for Stage 3? But if this request is made, it'd help to understand what the research question should be.

there's a channel for this that everyone can join

Is it public? I can search nothing for pipeline rooms on freenode nor matrix

I think support among JS developers is much higher than 10%...

also, actually, I think I disagree with this claim as stated, even aggregating the two forms. I doubt more than 10% of JS developers have even heard of it.

i do not have confidence in the State of JS poll

hack-style is basically "introduce a context in which there is a topic variable"

I mean use special token/syntax like Hack. I don't treat special identifier (for example, Kotlin's it) as Hack style.

HE Shi-Jun: i think i was wrong there let me get back to you

hmm, no i think indeed, to pass the yield from next the suggestion was to have a method that calls out that behavior... HE Shi-Jun can you point me to your concern in double ended iterators?

maybe after this term as editor, I will feel satisfied with the state of the spec and replace that work with protocols proposal work

I think it would be productive if there were specific examples of breakage, since this is an opt-in option.

that's basically what /v is currently proposed to be (or are you commenting specifically on how it is spelled?)

cancellation is a simple problem with a clear solution

regarding toArray in iterator-helpers, I hope to expand it in the future to be able to build more kinds of structures (adding a protocol like Buildable or Ana)

function* foo() {
    yield 1;
    return 2;
}
// undefined
it = foo()
// foo {<suspended>}
it.next()
// {value: 1, done: false}
it.return(3)
// {value: 3, done: true}